>> an enema? >> i know. what about regifting? i've experienced it myself. so is that ever appropriate? >> sure. i mean, there's etiquette. take the original card out and make sure it's wrapped. regifting is a way to keep the fruitcake going through time. it's out there, the same fruitcake or bottle of wine year after year. have a little common sense and make sure it's cleaned up and not dirty. >> i'm taking notes and i have to rethink the gift that i got you for this year now. >> i'll send you this. >> all yours, really. all yours, dean. happy holidays. nice to see you. >> nice seeing you. >> thanks for watching today. you can continue the conversation with me on twitter @randikaye. state of the union starts right now. the nra steps into the gun debate and house speaker boehner gets tripped up on the fiscal cliff by his own party.

today in the aftermath of newtown, the national rifle association offering a same school plan. >> the only think that stops a guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. >> our conversation with nra point man assa hutchinson. senator joe lieberman on the culture of violence. then the gop's civil war. >> not the outcome that i wanted, but that was the will of the house. >> republican versus republican on the fiscal cliff with congressman sooeven up lawsuit ter rhett and mcmulvaney. weighing in all of it is our political panel. "usa today's" washington bury rechief sussan page and ron duffy. i'm candy crowley. nine days after the mass

shooting deaths in newtown, the president of the national rifle association joined the gun debate. >> i call on congress today to act immediately to appropriate whatever is necessary to put armed police officers in every single school in this nation. >> in a similar vein, lawmakers in a growing number of states including oklahoma, missouri, south dakota, virginia and oregon will consider laws allowing teachers and school administrators to carry firearms at school. the nra is moving ahead to have their national model school shield in place to schools that want it. to talk about the dangers and backlash is the program director assa hutchinson. thank you for joining us. one of the thing that struck me is there was no mention of any gun control in favor or in opposition, so i wanted to get

you on the record. will the nra oppose any attempt to put new gun laws in place? >> well, that's a separate debate. my responsibility is school safety, and i think that's where the debate should center. we've got to act in a very urgent fashion to protect the children. my responsibility is to convene a high-level panel of experts to develop a model program for schools and new tools to use to protect our children. one of those options should be armed guards who are trained, but that should be an option for the schools. one of the tools that they can utilize, but that's the debate. it shouldn't be on new legislation as much as it should be on what to do to protect our children in school safety. that's my focus. >> debate, as you know, has a way of shaping itself, and you are working for the nra. so i'm trying to find out if there's anything in terms of gun

contr control. we know what's out there, sir. there's people that want to reinstate the ban on certain kinds of semi-automatic assault weapons. we know that people want to try and ban some of those ammo clips that can shoot as amamany as 10 and up of bullets in a short time. we know that there are those that want to close the loophole so if you buy a gun from a private owner, you have to go through a background check. are any of these acceptable to the nra? >> well, imt n'm not going spea that issue. >> don't you sfeek for the nra. you don't work for the nra and they don't pay you? >> i'm an independent consultant for the nra designed to focus on school safety. that is my mission. now, what i will say in terms of further gun control legislation is that that is the wrong part of the debate.

i think the focus should be on school safety. you can have bans on assault weapons or whatever weapons you wish, and it's not going to protect from a violent person. it's going to take someone who has security in the school. timothy mcveigh used fertilizer as his weapon. so let's not focus on the weapon as much as our response capability and safety of the children. that's simply my responsibility, and that's what i'm going to do and we're going to take the best experts in across the country to give these options to the schools. >> without speaking for the nra, do you personally think that there is any place for further restrictions on guns, particularly these high capacity guns? >> that's a debate that will take place. what i'm saying is it's not the solution. i want to look for solutions for safety in schools, and that's not the solution. that's the wrong debate to have if you want to talk about protecting our children.

we have one-third of our schools right now of the 23,000 schools that have armed guards. should the other two-thirds have armed guards? i certainly think it's an option that they should consider. it's not a novel approach, but it's a safety approach. there's other things that should be done. what i am going to be doing is looking at those options for the schools. >> you can understand this that people listen to the nra's response to focus on school safety and people saying, wait a second. to put more guns into the schools seems like exactly the wrong answer, that more guns is the wrong answer. >> certainly. that is a concern that's expressed. again, you go back, though, through history. president clinton started the cops program where you have resource officers who are armed in the schools as a result of that. there is partial funding, but

it's very limited and cut back and insufficient, obviously. it's going to take over $2 billion if you put a federal funded program for an armed person at every school. i think there's voluntary programs to look at if you have trained people, and we want to set up a model training for this. it should be an option that the local school board finally makes the decision. i can understand skepticism, but i think that school safety is the debate. i think it is terrific that the nra is willing to fund experts and st. louolutions free of cos the schools to hopefully create a voluntary program. >> it's more than skepticism. i want to read you two reactions to what the nra had to say. the first from mayor michael bloomberg who said they, meaning the nra, offered a paranoid vision of a more dangerous and violent america where everyone is armed and no place is same. the nra as's lobbyists blamed

everyone but nems for the crisis of gun violence. this is the new senator and he tweeted out walking out of another funeral and handed the nra transcript, the most revolting, tone-deaf statement i've seen. can i get your reaction to that reaction? >> well, live by my own statements, and i hope they look at those as well. they want to focus the debate on new laws and new prohibitions, and i'm saying that's the wrong debate. that's their solution. i believe a better solution is school safety initiatives, one of those options being an armed presence we have in one-third of the schools. p if you have an option of sending a child to a school with an armed presence who are trained that can protect the children or a school that doesn't have that option, right now the polls show in america most people would select the more secure school, the one that invests in security. so let's help these schools, and let's don't have a false debate that's not going to increase

safety in the long term for the most precious commodity in our society. >> i think that the debate certain can be a holistic one, but to take guns out of the debate seems naive at this point, listening to the public debate. you know, yes, it has to do with school security, but it has to do with guns and mental health and any number of things. it seems to many people that this sole approach by the nra does not take reality into consideration, that is, that some high capacity magazines and big guns are killing our children and killing people the on the streets. >> candy, you're right in the context there should be a broad debate. actually, the mental health issues is a central part of it. i think the comprehensiveness of our databases and the information we have in regard to that is an important part of it. obviously, the violence in video

games has been raised. there can be all of that debate. it's very appropriate. some of those issues can enhance safety. i have one singular focus, and it's something that shouldn't be neglected. that's where i think the debate in america has been confused, is that we're going to come out with mandatory laws that every school has to have a teacher with a gun. i don't think teachers go to get their education to do that. they want -- that's why you need to have separate resource officers and armed guards to have that protection. >> let me ask you one final question, and that is, where does this end? let's say, fine, people want to put armed professionals inside schools to protect children. there was a movie theater shot up in aurora and a shopping mall shot up in tucson. where does it end? can you arm every place that a gunman might go? put ex-police officers, whatever? it seems never-ending. >> you're right. it's a problem we have in our

society, and you know, movie theaters are making those decisions. many of them have retired police officers, off-duty police officers, malls have the same thing. so should we say we're not going-to-the sagoing to have the same type of protection going to school? certainly there's some schools and there's going to be some parts of society that say we don't want to do that investment. we'll take the risk. but let's look simply at the schools right now, what our focus is , and i think this initiative for enhanced safety is the right direction. >> is that the kind of country that you want for krur children and your grandchildren, just armed people outside any number of public institutions? >> well, what i wouldn't want would be someone carrying a terribly large weapon outside of a school, but i think when you have a trained officer -- for example, what's more sensitive

than our airplanes? people resisted having weapons on airplanes, but i oversaw the federal air marshals. it's a deterrent. no one sees that weapon, but they're protected on that airplane. it is a huge, positive impact on safety. schools are a sensitive environment as well, but you can provide safety and security with armed, trained personnel without putting fear in anyone. >> asa hutchinson heading up the nra school safety program. tha for your time this morning, sir. >> thank you, candy. >> there's not much where the president and the nra see eye to eye but violence and the media may be one. up next is senator joe lieberman. it's lots of things. all waking up. connecting to the global phenomenon we call the internet of everything. ♪ it's going to be amazing. and exciting. and maybe, most remarkably, not that far away.

we're going to wake the world up. and watch, with eyes wide, as it gets to work. cisco. tomorrow starts here. yeah. and you can get it with virgin mobile's plan. $35 a month with unlimited data and messaging included. with all the web surfing i want? yep. sounds like a data buffet. an all-you-can-eat data buffet. you know who would love our all-you-can-eat-data buffet? big lucy. big lucy! are you hungry? for all the data. [ male announcer ] get the season's hottest smartphones, like the kyocera rise. and get virgin mobile, with unlimited data and messaging included, for just $35 a month. from america's gift headquarters. walmart.

five days later, i had a massive heart attack.

bayer aspirin was the first thing the emts gave me. now, i'm on a bayer aspirin regimen. [ male announcer ] be sure to talk to your doctor before you begin an aspirin regimen. [ woman ] learn from my story.

[ male announcer ] when diarrhea hits, kaopectate stops it fast. powerful liquid relief speeds to the source. fast. [ male announcer ] stop the uh-oh fast with kaopectate. let me talk first about the nra and its safe school program. how does that strike you as the first statement coming out of the nra? >> i have found the statements by the nra over the last couple of days to be disheartening because the statements seem to not reflect any understanding

about the slaughter of children that happened in newtown, connecticut, just a little more than a week ago. it was a kind of hunker down. they could have made the same statement dish they did make the same statement after earlier acts of mass violence. you know, no one is saying -- here's what bothered me. the nra spokes people have been willing to deal with every possible cause of gun violence except guns. they're right that there's a problem for a society, how do you spot a child or a person who is troubled before they become a killer? what's the influence of violence in our entertainment culture on people? it's obviously also true that the easy availability of guns including military style saum weapons and say everything is on the table. what this does mean is that the

kind of new regulation of guns that president obama and vice president biden and a lot people like to see enacted early next year won't happen easily. it's a battle. the president and vice president are ready to lead the fight. it's going to take the american people getting organized, agitated, and talking to their members of congress. >> do you think the nra still has the clout it once did? they have several times been able to rally their folks on capitol hill to vote against extension of the gun ban, things like that. >> we'll see. i think this situation is different than the other acts of mass violence, columbine, aurora and virginia tech, because here those 20 beautiful innocent children, slaughtered and hit multiple times with bullets from that assault weapon. so we' see, but i tell you this. the strength of the nra is more than half of the adults in america have guns, own guns and

have them in their homes. we have to convince them that none of the proposals will take their guns away. the proposals will make it harder, hopefully impossible for people to buy assault weapons and cause the loopholes to make sure the people who are in in his term "bad guys" don't have the opportunity to buy guns. >> the number of households that own a gun has gone down a bit, but there are a lot of guns out there. i want to read you actually on another part of this argument, and that is about the culture and about these video games. we now at least believe that this shooter, in fact, did like some of these violent video games. this comes from the general council of the entertainment consumers association who said we agree with the supreme court's decisions and the volumes of scientific research which all clearly state that there is no causal link between media violence and real life

violence. do you agree with that? >> i don't agree with that, and i don't know what supreme court decision that person is thinking of. >> it was a free speech case. >> i mean, obviously, there's a free speech question, but i've spent a lot of time on this. most of the research that i've seen done shows that involvement, particularly intense involvement with violence in the entertainment culture makes people more aggressive. obviously, everybody who plays violent video games doesn't become a killer, but there are -- there's a vulnerable part of our population out there that is affected by it. i would say to the entertainment culture like to the nra, take your blinders off, take your earplugs out. 20 kids just got slaughtered, and we have to come to the table not defensively and aacknowledge these are not just other people's kids. they could be our kids and grandkids next time. i think the entertainment culture has to accept some

responsibility. you know, in almost every one of these cases of mass shootings, it's the same pattern. a young man troubled, reclusive, almost always involved in some kind of violent entertainment media gets guns and then kills a lot of people. we have to stop it. >> there's a lot here i wanted to ask you about, and i want to move on to senator chuck hagel, a man you know. we are led to believe he may be the person president obama wants to lead the defense department when secretary panetta leaves. you may know that a number of jewish organizations and folks on capitol hill have objected already to the idea of hagel saying he has had a number of anti-israeli votes, that he has said things they perceive as anti-israeli. has chuck hagel in your opinion disqualified himself because these various stances from becoming secretary of defense? >> i served with chuck hagel and

worked with him on some things. i like and respect him. i wouldn't say that his votes disqualify him. if i were in the senate on the armed services committee and he was nominated, i would have some really serious questions to ask him. not just about israel, but to me, the most significant foreign policy challenge for president obama and our country and the world in the next year or two is iran and it's nuclear weapons program. chuck hagel has had some very outlying votes on that. he's been -- >> he wants to establish communication. >> he's been consistently -- i think in that sense anybody who tries to communicate with iran has run into a brick wall, and chuck hagel has consistently been against economic sanctions to try to change the behavior of the islamic regime, the radical regime in tehran, which is the only way to do it short of war. so, in fact, as i look at chuck hagel's positions on iran, they

seem to me to be quite different than president obama. now, president obama obviously has earned the right to naum night whoever he wants. i think this is a very tough confirmation process. i don't know how it would end, but there are reasonable questions to ask and that chuck hagel has to answer. >> finally in our last minute i need you to solve the fiscal cliff problem. specifically we all know that the speaker left. he couldn't get his caucus to join him on his backup plan, and he said hey, mr. president and senator reid the majority leader in the senate, it's up to you to fix this. what is senator reid's next move should mitch mcconnell get into this? how does this play out? >> candy, in the aftermath of house republicans rejecting speaker boehner's so-called plan b, it's the first time i feel it's more likely that will go over the cliff than not. if we allow that to happen, it

will be the most colossal consequenceal act of congressional irresponsibility in a long time. maybe ever in american history, because of the impact it will have on almost every american. taxes up, programs cut probably sending us back into a recession. the ball is now clearly with the senate. senator reid and senator mcconnell have the ability to put this together again and pass something. it won't be a big, grand bargain to take care of the total debt, but they can do some things that will avoid the worst consequences going over the fiscal cliff. i've talked to a lot of republican colleagues in the senate who are favorably incl e inclined toward the idea it to protect the middle class from the tax cuts. let's raise taxes on people over 250,000, and let's stop those terrible cuts in defense, homeland security, education, et cetera. >> not much time left.

senator, after 24 years in the u.s. senate you are retiring, but you still have work to do. so i'm not going to say good-bye to you now, because i imagine we might speak to you again. >> i told my colleagues they're doing it to make sure those of us retiring this year work every last day of the term. we're going to spend new year's eve here i believe. >> thanks for the cheery note. thank you. good to see you. president obama is calling on the holiday spirit to avoid the fiscal cliff. >> everybody can cool off. everybody can drink some eggnog, have some christmas cookies, sing some christmas carols. >> but it may take more than divine inspiration. if so, this board gives me rates for . ere companies? yes. but you're progressive, and they're them. yes. but they're here. yes. are you...? there? yes. no. are you them? i'm me. but those rates are for... them. so them are here. yes!

you want to run through it again? no, i'm good. you got it? yes. rates for us and them -- now that's progressive. call or click today. we've decided to we're all having such a great year in the gulf, put aside our rivalry. 'cause all our states are great. and now is when the gulf gets even better. the beaches and waters couldn't be more beautiful. take a boat ride or just lay in the sun. enjoy the wildlife and natural beauty. and don't forget our amazing seafood. so come to the gulf, you'll have a great time. especially in alabama. you mean mississippi. that's florida. say louisiana or there's no dessert. brought to you by bp and all of us who call the gulf home.

welcome to chevy's year-end event. so, the 5.3-liter v8 silverado can tow up to 9,600 pounds? 315 horsepower. what's that in reindeer-power? [ laughs ] [ pencil scratches ]

[ male announcer ] chevy's giving more. get the best offer of the year -- 0% apr financing for 60 months plus $1,000 holiday bonus cash. plus trade up for an additional $1,000 trade-in allowance. hurry. bonus cash ends january 2nd.

six weeks after his unanimous re-election aas speaker he faced a mini mutiny in his own congress. they said they would oppose his backup plan to keep tax cuts in place. the speaker saw the setback as a

see mantic problem. >> listen, there was a perception created that that vote last night was going to increase taxes. now, i disagree with that characterization of the bill, but that impression was out there. now, we had a number of our members who just really didn't want to be perceived as having to raise taxes. that was the real issue. >> with that the speaker pulled his plan b from the house floor, told the president and senate democrats they needed to come up with something to avoid the fiscal cliff, and then he took off for ohio with a parting blast at the president that went off to hawaii. >> and he refuses to challenge the members of his party to deal honestly with the entitlement reform and the big issues facing our nation. that's why we find ourselves here today. >> the holiday season is beginning to seem a lot more like groundhog day. bh he we return, long-time boehner ally and fellow ohioans steven la turret and

south carolina's mcmulvaney. questions?

anyone have occasional constipation, diarrhea, gas, bloating? yeah. one phillips' colon health probiotic cap each day helps defend against these digestive issues with three strains of good bacteria. approved! [ female announcer ] live the regular life. phillips'. we don't let frequent heartburn come between us and what we love. so if you're one of them people who gets heartburn and then treats day after day... block the acid with prilosec otc and don't get heartburn in the first place! [ male announcer ] one pill each morning. 24 hours. zero heartburn.

you are a republican, congressman, who said signaled at the very least and probably said outright i'm not going to vote for the speaker's plan. it strikes me that you want to stand on principle, you're fighting for principle, no tax increases for everyone, and the net result is tax increases for everyone. >> the reason that i was no on plan b was that i was never convinced and still not convinced that the senate was ever going to take it up. people seem to assume in these discussions that all the house had to do was pass the bill and it's the end the of the discussion. i believed from the very beginning and continue to believe that the president has no interest at all in not going over the cliff. he wants to go over the cliff. everything i've looked at and seen out of the white house. >> why help him? >> what choice do we have? passing the plan b the other night would not have changed the outcome. we were going over the cliff before. we're going over the cliff now because it's what the president wants. you cannot negotiate with someone who does not want to negotiate. >> do you share -- i know you

don't share his outlook on what to do with plan b. do you share the outlook the president is not interested? >> i don't know that he's not interested. i don't think he's been serious. we've done nothing -- >> he did win. >> no, no, no. he was serious about campaigning and he did win, and that's what plan b was all about. the speaker made it clear. the president is the president. taxes are going up on every american. that's a fact. where the president has not been serious is the other side of the equation. he's all about taxes. he has this mandate on taxes. the spending cuts, the need to get us out of this mess, he hasn't been serious about those, and then that's unfortunate. so, you know, i think where mick and i may be part company is this needs the big deal. i'm okay to say, president, you won. you can tax these rich people you seem to dislike so much, but, you know what? come up with spending cuts. we're borrowing ail trillion dollars a year, and he's not. >> i want to show you one of the our latest polls, and the

question was which party should compromise more? 53% thought the republicans should compromise more, and 41% said the democrats. so it's not just the president won. you've seen poll after poll. they blame republicans if their taxes go up. you don't want anyone's taxes to go up, and yet, you are admitting here, saying i think everybody's taxes are going up. >> i don't know it's a question of who should compromise more? we recognize in order to get to a compromise. the question is who is supposed to lead? the president is the president. he won an election and that's fine. it's not what steve or i wanted but it's the world we live in. >> he went to almost 440 or something, he said okay let's lift the ceiling on those who will keep their taxes in place from 250 to 400 something. >> the president talks about a balanced deal. he has yet to propose one.

when the debt ceiling came up a year ago in august, he and the speaker were working on a big deal. this requires a big deal. the only thing that the president has apput on the tabl which is $300 billion over ten years. >> adjusting how the cost of living is dpon for social security. >> second of all, the whole tax brouhaha raising $90 million a year. that would run the government from the end of the fiscal year to columbus day. this is a bigger problem than that. >> yes, there was that -- the big deal that they seem to be so close to that you now want, but isn't the thing that scuttled at that deal house republicans? >> absolutely not. absolutely not. >> wasn't it that the speaker couldn't get you all behind him? >> no. >> you all loved that deal? >> no. we weren't the ones -- what's the on the table right now from the white house, not the

short-term fix the president offered the other day but the big deal we're talking about, it was a dollar in tax increases for every 80 cents of spending reductions. what's the 5:1 deal or famous 10:1 deal so popular during the republican primary for president. where have those deals gone? they're gone. the president was widely documented having said during the first round of discussions when boehner said i put $800 billion on the table. the president said i get that for free because i won the election. that's not a negotiation. the president is not serious about preventing us from going over the cliff. candy, think about it. what happens if we go over the cliff? we get rid of the bush era tax cuts, which the democrats don't like, and we have the military, which is the holy grail to many folks in their party. i don't know why we assume the president doesn't want to go over the cliff. i believe his actions and words say we're going over. >> has the speaker lost control of the caucus? >> well, i'm like mick speak to this one. >> no, and i get asked that a

lot. i think that the vote on thursday is portrayed as a vote so leadership. >> he couldn't get it done. isn't that a view into his leadership? >> what's not widely reported is the broad base of opposition or the mix of the base of opposition. there were a lot of moderates against the plan on thursday night. a lot of conservatives were for the plan. this was not a fight that divided conservatives and moderates within the party. this was a legislation-specific vote and not a vote on leadership. >> john boehner, who is a good friend of mine, is an institutionalist. he reached the conclusion that when you are faced with a white house, a senate that doesn't seem to be able to get anything done that we should save as many people as possible. his argument was if you have, you know museums on fire and there's 100 paintings in it, you can save 99 in them, does that mean you shouldn't go in because you can't save the 100th

painting? that's where we found ourselves the oert night and that's why i was supportive. the reason he was a problem isn't a lack of leadership and it's because we have opinions and he lefts people participate, which wasn't the case in the past. >> he's paying the price for that at the moment, because this clearly isn't what he wanted. what's the strategy in the house? are you going to let it go over the cliff? is that it? >> it's up to the senate. >> so without senate action, the house lets it go. >> the democrats control the white house and senate. where is their plan and proposal? >> have you been promised by speaker boehner he will not put anything out there unless the majority of the majority in the republican -- the majority of the majority of republicans agrees with it? >> i have not heard that. >> that's sort of an unwritten rule. >> the reason it's unwritten is because it came about during the delay in the administration when he needs a majority of a

majority. boehner hasn't operated in that manner. if there was a deal he thought could pass and achieve what needs to be aachieveded for america, and that is the revenue side plus the spending side, he'd put that on the floor. that's his greatest strength and weakness, because it makes it difficult to run the house from time to time. >> thank you for joining me this morning. maybe we'll see you after christmas. >> merry christmas. >> thank you. we'll be right back. bayer advan. in fact, in a recent survey, 95% of people who tried it agreed that it relieved their headache fast. visit fastreliefchallenge.com today for a special trial offer. for my big family, for the big holiday. we like to watch big games. we're such big fans. got a big spread together. so it's gotta be big. how about the 60-inch vizio hdtv. it's led. that's big... but i got a little budget. with the walmart credit card special financing you can go big this year. that's big time! alright! [ male announcer ] get the season's hottest brands, like the vizio 60-inch led tv. and use your walmart credit card and have the choice

of no interest if paid in full in 24 months. or buy a product care plan and get a credit for the plan cost. america's gift headquarters. walmart. make a wish! i wish we could lie here forever. i wish this test drive was over, so we could head back to the dealership. [ male announcer ] it's practically yours. test drive! but we still need your signature. volkswagen sign then drive is back. and it's never been easier to get a jetta. that's the power of german engineering.

get $0 down, $0 due at signing, $0 deposit, and $0 first month's payment on any new volkswagen. visit vwdealer.com today. they all left town. >> as we leave town for a few days to be with the families for the holidays. >> we're prepared to come back if needed. >> when we return, guns the fiscal cliff and the potential nomination of chuck hagel. [ female announcer ] what if the next big thing, isn't a thing at all?

it's lots of things. all waking up. connecting to the global phenomenon we call the internet of everything. ♪ it's going to be amazing. and exciting. and maybe, most remarkably, not that far away. we're going to wake the world up. and watch, with eyes wide, as it gets to work. cisco. tomorrow starts here.

[ male announcer ] when diarrhea hits, kaopectate stops it fast. powerful liquid relief speeds to the source. fast. [ male announcer ] stop the uh-oh fast with kaopectate. with me now is mike duffy and susan page and our cnn political analyst ron brown steen who has a day job. >> the at the national journal. >> let's talk about the fiscal cliff. from what we learned, we're going over this thing. >> we're either going over the fiscal cliff or the house is ultimately going to have to pass a bill that amajority of house republicans oppose. the most significant thing we heard was that from congressman latourette that john boehner wasn't wed to the rule that says

the leadership won't bring a bill to the floor with a support of the majority from the majority. clooirts they don't overlap. there's no bill that can get a majority ofhouse republicans they would sign. either going over the cliff and have to pass a bill with the house. >> i thought we would have a deal maybe not a small deal and not a dig deal. i don't think na anymore and it's more likely going over the cliff. the effect of doing that on the economy and effect of the sense washington can't govern itself. thaetsd what we heard from republican house members and hear from the white house. it's not catastrophic you can't consider going over the fiscal cliff. >> we've been told this is hoor risk and unemployment will shoot up and now it's not that big of a deal. >> it depends on what happens.

if they turn around quickly and find the voes to do something larger it won't be. what happened this week that's important is we get from talking about a fairly large deal, 3, $4 trillion to take some long term sort of whacks. talk about something fairly small over the next five or six days, just to raise taxes and no real entitlement cuts. latourette said when he left there would be republican votes in the house for this measure if there was a spending piece, and it had to be 2-1. they have a ways to go to get to that arrangement. >> the world on the other side of the cliff is probably more difficult for republicans than democrats, because as you pointed out in your question, if there is stalemate, taxes go up on everyone. you know, that would take it -- there are some people that say that's the best outcome going back to the clinton tax rates. it takes a huge bite out of the deficit, but on balance neither

side wants to do that today, but, you know, for republicans it's a tougher pill to swallow. many suggest if you go over the cliff, they come back and then have to agree to extend the tax rate for everybody below some number. >> that debt deal turns out to be brilliant or something. >> what matter is the simpson boles commission which president obama didn't want to appoint and pay attention to, that's front and center. the blueprint for how we move on. these two guys took on a task that was a fool's errands we thought, what happens to the commissions, nothing. we go back to them. >> let's talk about the die nam in this case between senator reid and mcconnell. can they come up with something up with something that the senate would pass and also something the house would pass? >> they have to try by new year's eve here. >> three days, four days. >> interesting that senator reid said he would like neal abercrombie to appoint the

replacement for daniel anyway. reid thinks he'll need that vote. they'll probably move it, but we have a senate sort of chapter here before new year's eve and then it goes back. i'm not optimistic about either. i think it has gotten harder on both scores. >> the vast majority of republicans are kind of barricaded into safe districts. they are largely immune to the democratic currents that made it so hard to win the white house. you have democrats who kind of look at this and say, wow, president obama gave up too much in his final offer when he went up to $400,000 on the taxes. you know, both sides, decades of polarization and you are seeing on the debt ceiling and this, it is hard to find the bridges between the parties that are representing very different americas and different coalitions. >> also looking at the possibility of going back to the minority and couple years in the minority tends to cure purests after after a while.

>> you would hope. one thing that did not happen this week, the democrats could not come to conclusion what cuts in spending they would like to make. that party is as hard over on spending. >> we haven't actually seen, we have watched and they're both arguing the other's issue. you know -- >> we kept thinking couple weeks ago, we said, just not time yet. they never do anything. we are now at the time. and it does not feel like anybody is moving toward a deal. >> it feels like we're in a different era and in the old days, even the '80s and '90s you came to the cliff and there was george mitchal and they found a way back. and now it is just much more difficult. the polarization is much more entrenched and harder for these parties to come together, even when they feel the alternative is worse. >> they no longer feel the alternative is worse. they feel the alternative is better than what i'm going to get if i act in the next ten days. >> i will move you to guns real quickly. so much going on with the fiscal

cliff, hard to imagine they're going to jump in to this gun debate really any time soon. i think people say, oh, we're going to act now on guns. well, now is a relative term on capitol hill. when will that happen? >> any time in the next decade. we saw the president try to buy some time this week by appointing his task force and had his first meeting and his first meeting was with cops and his second and third meeting will be with cops because not a lot of people to meet. senator lieberman required to pass something, that could be months. >> look at your interview with congressman with hutchinson and the nra press conference on friday. that made it clear that americans agree what happened at sandy hook elementary is unspeakable and terrible and a tragedy. there is no consensus on what to do next. and that news conference underscored the fact that that

divide has not gotten any nar w narrower in the wake of that tragedy. >> no consensus and no debate. democrats, i think, paralyzed by a myth. gun control is facing, you know, there is not as much support for gun control as there was 20 years ago, but the deterioration primarily among the groups they are struggling with anyway. within the half of the electorate that is open for voting for a democrat, for the president in significant. gun control over gun rights, still an audience, not a consensus. >> i have 30 seconds. i really need a yes or a no. if the president nominates chuck hagel to be the next pentagon chief, will he be approved in the u.s. senate? >> yes. >> yes. >> okay. unanimity. happy. happy holidays, thank you, all. i appreciate it. when we return, another kennedy eyes the senate seat in massachusetts. [ sniffs ] i have a cold.

[ sniffs ] i took dayquil but my nose is still runny. [ male announcer ] truth is, dayquil doesn't treat that. really? [ male announcer ] alka-seltzer plus fights your worst cold symptoms, plus it relieves your runny nose. [ breathes deeply ] awesome. [ male announcer ] yes, it is. that's the cold truth!

before we leave. a check of the headlines. south korean officials say that rocket launched by north korea earlier this month shows the reclusive nation has developed the technology to fire a warhead

capable of reaching the united states. despite international condeminations the launch was soon as a boost to north korea's new leader kim jong-un. italy pulled itself out of the debt crisis. monte is widely credited with saving italy from a financial meltdown after stepping into the prime minister's role following the resignation of silvio berlusconi last year. sparked concern that italy may slip back into a recession. president obama and members of the senate will gather later today to say good-bye to one of their own. senator daniel inouye who served. he died last week of respiratory complications. he was 88. senate majority leader has called on abercrombie to appoint a successor before the end of the year. ted kennedy jr., son of